|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/14/2008 10:04:32 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3075
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
A figurative reading of Genesis is exactly what YEC opposes Almost 1300 posts in over three years and you still don't have the foggiest idea what YEC "opposes"?! I'm sorry, Dan, that I have failed so miserably to get the truth across in these threads. Forgive me.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/14/2008 10:09:48 PM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 2031
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
A figurative reading of Genesis is exactly what YEC opposes Almost 1300 posts in over three years and you still don't have the foggiest idea what YEC "opposes"?! I'm sorry, Dan, that I have failed so miserably to get the truth across in these threads. Forgive me.
Ok, YEC opposes an incorrect reading of Genesis. Practically speaking, that amounts to all non-literal interpretations.
You still didn't address the point of my post.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/14/2008 10:17:01 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3075
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
I suppose I was being diplomatic by not pointing out that using their position to lend credence to zillions of years of evolution is way past "rather dishonest"! However, I see diplomacy is not your strength. Do you even know what the so-called figurative interpretation of the Alexandrian school referred to, Dan?
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/16/2008 5:45:07 PM
|
|
|
Zuniceratops
Posts: 24
Joined: 3/16/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
They would have every reason to think so, because, although the Bible does not teach a fixed earth/moving sun (the references are mostly tangential to the main point), it does consistently assume this is the case. That is why you have the undeniable historical fact that this is what interpreters of scripture understood the Bible to say.
The Bible does not assume geocentrism. The whole of Scripture has the same meaning whether the reader assumes geocentrism or heliocentrism. This is true of all verses that may seem to require geocentrism; their meaning is not changed when one instead assumes heliocentrism, or geokineticism.
The interpreters of the past believed in geocentrism because it was the scientific theory with the most evidence at the time, and later, because it had been made church tradition, not because the Bible taught it or required it. Galieo himself firmly believed in the Bible both before and after he accepted Copernican theory, and tried to establish that the theory is compatible with Scripture. The Bible neither supports nor teaches against either geocentrism or heliocentrism, and a believer of either can come away from the Bible believing the same cosmology he did before he read it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/16/2008 9:57:01 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zuniceratops
quote:
They would have every reason to think so, because, although the Bible does not teach a fixed earth/moving sun (the references are mostly tangential to the main point), it does consistently assume this is the case. That is why you have the undeniable historical fact that this is what interpreters of scripture understood the Bible to say.
The Bible does not assume geocentrism. The whole of Scripture has the same meaning whether the reader assumes geocentrism or heliocentrism. This is true of all verses that may seem to require geocentrism; their meaning is not changed when one instead assumes heliocentrism, or geokineticism.
Right, because the references are tangential to the main point, the main point is not changed whether one thinks of the foundations of the earth are a literal physical structure or a poetic phrase.
quote:
The interpreters of the past believed in geocentrism because it was the scientific theory
And because it was also the scientific (really pre-scientific) view of the writers of scripture and their contemporaries. Of course the bible appears to be written consistently with a geocentric point of view----because it was written by those who held that view and subsequently interpreted by those who held that view.
That is why it took extra-biblical evidence to show that it was an incorrect view of the cosmos. There was no way the Copernican view (or even the Ptolemaic view) could be derived directly from scripture. People like Copernicus and Kepler and Galileo had to observe creation itself to get a different perspective and then re-interpret scripture in the light of what those observations told them.
If the Church had insisted that observation of nature and logical reasoning about those observations was not allowable as an input into interpreting scripture---that only scripture can interpret scripture, it would still be incumbent on Christians, as a matter of faith, to uphold at least geocentrism if not a flat-earth cosmology.
But, as you say, allowing an input from created nature did not, in fact, harm any biblical teaching. All the passages could be, and were, re-interpreted in light of the new scientific information without harm to the message of scripture.
quote:
Galieo himself firmly believed in the Bible both before and after he accepted Copernican theory, and tried to establish that the theory is compatible with Scripture.
Just as Cuvier, Sedgewick and Hugh Ross all firmly believe(d) in the Bible before and after they accepted the antiquity of the earth and established interpretations of scripture compatible with the observations that led us to understand how old the earth and the whole universe are.
And just as Asa Gray, Collins, Miller, Van Til and many ordinary Christians from all walks of life continue to believe in the Bible both before and after accepting the theory of evolution including the evolution of our own species and the fact that we share a common ancestor with chimps, all great apes, all primates, mammals, vertebrates, eukaryotes, indeed all life forms. And we re-interpret key passages of scripture in light of the biological facts of evolution.
Anyone who accepts that the message of scripture is unchanged by the switch from pre-scientific geocentrism to scientific heliocentrism, should be able to say the same relative to the age of the earth/universe and evolution/common descent.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 11:26:08 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3075
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Anyone who accepts that the message of scripture is unchanged by the switch from pre-scientific geocentrism to scientific heliocentrism, should be able to say the same relative to the age of the earth/universe and evolution/common descent. And so you would totally ignore, deny, and reject six specific uses of "evening and morning the first through sixth day", eight specific uses of "according to their kinds", and over 50 OT passages specifically recording the historical fact of God creating the world, not His evolving life through common descent?!
no, NO, NO - I will never be able to equate scientific heliocentrism with completely unscientific uniformitarian evolutionism! The message of Scripture is clear - God created life according to its kinds during a span of four days. "Re-interpreting key passages of scripture in light of the biological facts of evolution" is lousy exegesis and even lousier "science"!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 12:27:43 PM
|
|
|
hellohellohi
Posts: 541
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
The Bible says that people used to live hundreds of years, right? So, why don't we forsake this insipid modern life-way for the Biblical-era's -- I see nothing wrong with it, and in return we might find our lifespan would increase many-fold!
Why not?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 12:31:50 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 632
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
Anyone who accepts that the message of scripture is unchanged by the switch from pre-scientific geocentrism to scientific heliocentrism, should be able to say the same relative to the age of the earth/universe and evolution/common descent. And so you would totally ignore, deny, and reject six specific uses of "evening and morning the first through sixth day", eight specific uses of "according to their kinds", and over 50 OT passages specifically recording the historical fact of God creating the world, not His evolving life through common descent?!
And the ideas of talking snakes, trees of life, etc etc scream out to the reader that allegory or symbolism is being used to illustrate some point.
quote:
no, NO, NO - I will never be able to equate scientific heliocentrism with completely unscientific uniformitarian evolutionism! The message of Scripture is clear - God created life according to its kinds during a span of four days. "Re-interpreting key passages of scripture in light of the biological facts of evolution" is lousy exegesis and even lousier "science"!
Actually, the literalists re-interpret scripture in contrast to most notable historical figures in from both Judaism and Christianity. Literlists are practicing faulty exegesis that goes against millenia of common thought. There is no need to re-interpret scripture in light of evolution. The interpretations that were mainstream for centuries are still mainstream today and just as valid, with or without evolution.
< Message edited by drj11 -- 6/17/2008 12:38:37 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 12:48:12 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1026
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
no, NO, NO - I will never be able to equate scientific heliocentrism with completely unscientific uniformitarian evolutionism! The message of Scripture is clear - God created life according to its kinds during a span of four days.
Too bad the fossil record shows otherwise. Trilobites are never found in the same layers as dinosaurs, and dinosaur fossils are never found with human fossils. These different species were not contemporaries. The thickness of the layers demonstrates that they were separated in time by more than a couple days.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 2:43:57 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3075
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Actually, the literalists re-interpret scripture in contrast to most notable historical figures in from both Judaism and Christianity. Actually, drj, the most notable historical figure from both Judaism and Christianity is Jesus of Nazareth. He made His interpretation abundantly clear in Matt 19:4 and Mark 10:6! I'm really only interested in one notable Figure since He was the only One there to tell us about it.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 3:28:38 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 632
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
Actually, the literalists re-interpret scripture in contrast to most notable historical figures in from both Judaism and Christianity. Actually, drj, the most notable historical figure from both Judaism and Christianity is Jesus of Nazareth. He made His interpretation abundantly clear in Matt 19:4 and Mark 10:6! I'm really only interested in one notable Figure since He was the only One there to tell us about it.
I don't see how those are particularly supportive of your interpretation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 3:37:27 PM
|
|
|
Zuniceratops
Posts: 24
Joined: 3/16/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
Anyone who accepts that the message of scripture is unchanged by the switch from pre-scientific geocentrism to scientific heliocentrism, should be able to say the same relative to the age of the earth/universe and evolution/common descent.
DrMark had a point earlier. Overthrowing a scientific theory based on a few verses that are part of poetry and aren't even talking about the subject is a long leap from rejecting a theory based on three chapters in a historical narrative that detail the subject directly, not to mention all the verses that refer to those first three chapters and also provide support for the theory.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 3:50:19 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3075
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
I don't see how those are particularly supportive of your interpretation. Of course, I fully expected you would not be able to see YEC interpretation in God's Word! Your mind is (presently) closed to all but your own religion of uniformitarian naturalism. However, it's quite obvious to those who do not worship their faulty assumptions that "God made the first male and female humans at the beginning of creation" is diametrically opposed to millions of years of evolutionary common descent.
quote:
DrMark had a point earlier. Thanks, Zunic, but good points don't get very far when one's faith is shaped by faulty human-derived assumptions.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 4:23:02 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
Anyone who accepts that the message of scripture is unchanged by the switch from pre-scientific geocentrism to scientific heliocentrism, should be able to say the same relative to the age of the earth/universe and evolution/common descent. And so you would totally ignore, deny, and reject six specific uses of "evening and morning the first through sixth day", eight specific uses of "according to their kinds",
No. I don't need to ignore them.
quote:
and over 50 OT passages specifically recording the historical fact of God creating the world, not His evolving life through common descent?!
Creating the world and common descent are compatible realities. No need to think of them as contradictory.
quote:
"God made the first male and female humans at the beginning of creation" i
That, however, is not what Jesus said.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 4:24:27 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zuniceratops
quote:
Anyone who accepts that the message of scripture is unchanged by the switch from pre-scientific geocentrism to scientific heliocentrism, should be able to say the same relative to the age of the earth/universe and evolution/common descent.
DrMark had a point earlier. Overthrowing a scientific theory based on a few verses that are part of poetry and aren't even talking about the subject is a long leap from rejecting a theory based on three chapters in a historical narrative that detail the subject directly, not to mention all the verses that refer to those first three chapters and also provide support for the theory.
What "historical" narrative would that be?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 4:26:28 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3075
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
By all means, gluadys, please share your knowledge of Greek before I take this issue to the Bible threads where several will confirm the precision of my paraphrase.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 4:54:16 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
By all means, gluadys, please share your knowledge of Greek before I take this issue to the Bible threads where several will confirm the precision of my paraphrase.
Just learning Greek. One thing I did note in Mark 10:6 is that the word 'creation' (ktiseos') appears to have a genitive plural ending. Got any comment on that?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 11:30:10 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3075
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
Nice dodge.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/17/2008 11:51:29 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
Nice dodge.
So, do you agree it is a plural ending? I wonder what "creations" then, Jesus was speaking of?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/18/2008 11:04:27 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3075
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
I wonder what "creations" then, Jesus was speaking of? All the various creative acts are very clearly described in Genesis 1, but I realize you have your allegorical fairy tale interpretation to uphold.
Verse 1 - time, space, and matter
Verse 3 - light
Verse 5 - diurnal variation
Verse 7 - sky
Verse 9 - land and seas
Verse 12 - plants and trees
Verse 16 - sun, moon, and stars
Verse 21 - marine life and flying animals
Verse 25 - terrestrial animals
Verse 27 - male and female human beings, one each
Is that non-mythical enough for you, gluadys? I doubt it!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/18/2008 12:25:04 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
I wonder what "creations" then, Jesus was speaking of? All the various creative acts are very clearly described in Genesis 1, but I realize you have your allegorical fairy tale interpretation to uphold.
Verse 1 - time, space, and matter
Verse 3 - light
Verse 5 - diurnal variation
Verse 7 - sky
Verse 9 - land and seas
Verse 12 - plants and trees
Verse 16 - sun, moon, and stars
Verse 21 - marine life and flying animals
Verse 25 - terrestrial animals
Verse 27 - male and female human beings, one each
Is that non-mythical enough for you, gluadys? I doubt it!
Of course they are clearly described. That doesn't make the description either history or science. What makes you think a mythical representation cannot clearly and truthfully describe creation within the textual framework of a myth? "myth" as a literary form does not mean "false" "deceptive" or "worthless".
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/18/2008 1:00:25 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3075
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Of course they are clearly described. Just as Jesus clearly describes God making humans during creation week.
quote:
That doesn't make the description either history or science. Correct, the literary genre of Genesis 1-11 demonstrates that the description is historical narrative. Just as the genre of Jesus' reiteration of Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 indicates that He considered this to be historical fact. Why do you doubt Jesus' exegesis? Is He fallible?
quote:
What makes you think a mythical representation cannot clearly and truthfully describe creation within the textual framework of a myth? What makes you think that "male and female" are scientifically real terms, but "the Creator made" and "at the beginning" are mere allegory, spoken by Jesus in the very same sentence? You really cannot see your inconsistency, can you gluadys?
quote:
"myth" as a literary form does not mean "false" "deceptive" or "worthless". Myth is fiction; Biblical history is fact!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/18/2008 1:06:12 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 679
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
Verse 9 - land and seas
Verse 12 - plants and trees
Verse 16 - sun, moon, and stars
Verse 21 - marine life and flying animals
Verse 25 - terrestrial animals
Good Doctor, let's not forget that it just wasn't any plants that were created in verse 12, it was flowering plants, angiosperms. The first "plants" were supposed to have evolved around the same time as vertebrates crept onto land, 400ish million years ago. Angiosperms didn't follow until long after (150ish million years ago). I'm not sure whether uniformitarianism or the Theory of Evolution allows for the sun, moon, and stars forming after angiosperms. Perhaps during the Pliocene. Regardless, there is no reconciling the first chapter of Genesis with evolution theory as it currently stands.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/18/2008 1:22:28 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1026
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DanJames
Good Doctor, let's not forget that it just wasn't any plants that were created in verse 12, it was flowering plants, angiosperms. The first "plants" were supposed to have evolved around the same time as vertebrates crept onto land, 400ish million years ago. Angiosperms didn't follow until long after (150ish million years ago). I'm not sure whether uniformitarianism or the Theory of Evolution allows for the sun, moon, and stars forming after angiosperms. Perhaps during the Pliocene. Regardless, there is no reconciling the first chapter of Genesis with evolution theory as it currently stands.
This is not so much a difficulty in reconciling this interpretation of Genesis with evolutionary theory as it is a difficulty in reconciling this interpretation of Genesis with astronomy, physics, geology, palaeontology and biology.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: geocentrism as a case study of interpretation - 6/18/2008 1:37:47 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 679
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
quote:
ORIGINAL: DanJames
Good Doctor, let's not forget that it just wasn't any plants that were created in verse 12, it was flowering plants, angiosperms. The first "plants" were supposed to have evolved around the same time as vertebrates crept onto land, 400ish million years ago. Angiosperms didn't follow until long after (150ish million years ago). I'm not sure whether uniformitarianism or the Theory of Evolution allows for the sun, moon, and stars forming after angiosperms. Perhaps during the Pliocene. Regardless, there is no reconciling the first chapter of Genesis with evolution theory as it currently stands.
This is not so much a difficulty in reconciling this interpretation of Genesis with evolutionary theory as it is a difficulty in reconciling this interpretation of Genesis with astronomy, physics, geology, palaeontology and biology.
Could you expound on that? It sounds like what you're saying is that my sentence was worded incorrectly, and you're not going to reply to what I said because of it.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
